RUMOR: CMOS, LiveView, RAW video

[JeffVo]

   Almost 2 years ago exactly I sat down with a Phase rep with a few people and the new (at the time) P65.  We had a candid conversation about Phase and I asked a few pointed questions:  What is Phases' stance on Video?  What of the rumors of wireless?  What of the rumors of a global shutter?  I had heard rumors of an "on chip global shutter" and wireless at least a year before this point (2007) from people close to Phase.   The answer to the video question: Phase thinks video is a fad.  The answer to wireless: The company that had worked on the tech went out of business and it would never clear the FCC.  The answer to Global shutter: Maybe someday.  I've also heard rumors of a Phase Photoshop like program, and a few others that escape me at the moment.  In the two years since nothing has materialized.  Well, I guess C1 5 rose out of the ashes of 4, but thats about it.  Phase really mystifies me.  Their backs coupled with their software are still the best. Period. However, they seem to simply trudge along resting on their laurels. I see more and more shooters I know putting down their Phases and using the Canons (faster than MF) as clients want more for their dollar even at the highest levels (clients think the Canon files are just Dandy).  Phase was silent at Photokina this year, and with the continued downturn I guess I understand.  Its certainly an interesting move to put the biggest chip around (80mp) in their "sister line" of Leaf.  Perhaps that bodes well from something revolutionary from Phase next round.  Lets hope.  But, if history is any indication it doesn't seem Phase has much up its sleeve beside more MP, a few new lenses and a new body someday.  -JV

[bcooter]

99% of the video being produced today is a fad. 

T-Mark is right that the web video numbers for actual advertising and brand building aren't very impressive, but that doesn't really matter if a client asks for video during a still shoot.

A lot of advertising works, a lot doesn't, but when the client says they want video, then we add on video, just as if a client says they want to shoot in studio, or on location, or with a dog, a cat, their girlfriend/boyfriend . . .

Commerce comes with a long list of what you can and can't do, commerce comes with another long list of what is expected.

I had lunch this weekend with a client, long lunch, good client and we talked about the philosophy of shooting a commercial project, (still or video) and honestly though we all pour our heart and soul into a gig, that doesn't mean it's "our" project as so many decisions are made way up the line (before and after a shoot)  by people few of us ever meet.    The guys with the corner offices are the deciders, not us photographers, at least not for work that pays really well.

So in relevance to this thread as far as Phase adding motion capabilities, ok, fine, good, whatever, but no still camera will replace a real dedicated motion camera for serious production, Sony, Red, Panasonic and Arriflex pretty much have the medium to high end covered anyway.

But if Phase does make a better still camera, with live view, or just a good lcd,  more moveable iso and gets a better camera platform for all that digital capture expertise then they'll probably do very well.

I still think the real hurdle for high end camera makers is to get their cameras in the hands of more photographers and stop the 5d2 bleeding.

It can be done, but not in the traditional way they market their cameras now, but that's another topic.


BC

[Rob C]

Why would anyone want to shoot video with a MF camera?

Not an answer to your question, but a remark about the third shot in your Gallery: the girl with the basket of fruit.

Have you noticed how similar she looks to one of Sally Mann's daughters... she's not, is she?

Rob C

[Morgan_Moore]

with screens becoming the major viewing platform I just see video as an essential thing

@bcooter
will DSLR replace red/bigger cams ?

did DSLR replace MFBD - I think so for 80% - it took a few years but they did

as for phase - Id love a motion back for my H1

16mp stills plus motion with a FF35 crop would be fine and usable 800 ISO

On switching off - well we can change channel on the TV its even easier on the web most photographers have not understood 'arc' ie a story or way of pulling a viewer in or not allowing them to switch over

on value to brand , I think vid has value, not imediate but value in the same way as the logo on a sports stars jumper adds value (or doesnt?)

S

[fredjeang]

And also, we have to remember that it's not just a tech or photographer culture, but this is massive world wide culture.
Look with what the little child are playing with, it's amazing. It's all about interactivity and motion.

Now that cutting trees is going to be as out-of-the-law as smoking, paper will not have the importance it has now. Epson should start to think about screens right now.

I see already screens in art galleries and this is not a tendency that will go backwards.

The biggest newspapers here have already did a campaign for the I.pad. That was displayed in all Madrid this summer.

IMO, the average photographer, not big production but the mass, included weddings will have video. The art galleries will have video, the editorials, every area. I bet my hat that only stills will not be possible very soon for the professional photographer at any level of the profession.

[BJL]

Why would anyone want to shoot video with a MF camera?

It seems that the anonymous "creative house in Sydney, Australia" cited only said Live View, and then the EOSHD site extrapolated with "and that means video capabilities". But Live View could work with far lower quality and data-rates than the video output that would be worth using an MFDB for. Like crude subsampling on both rows and columns, no binning or smoothing.

Such Live View could be doable with ILT CCD, which Kodak for example already makes. But so far, ILT CCD lags FF CCD significantly for DR due mainly to the lower well-capacity, and probably for that reason in particular has been spurned so far in favor of FF CCD by MF, Leica and the early Olympus Four Thirds cameras. Maybe the DR gap can be closed with newer fabrication processes (smaller feature size).

But not if a global shutter is needed: that has a hard requirement that at most half of the photosite area is available to gather light, because a region of equal electron capacity must be masked off for use of the global shutter. Hence the poor well capacity of the latest, greatest, global shutter endowed Kodak ILT CCD's like the 29MP 36x24mm one under discussion lately.

[bcooter]

snip......will DSLR replace red/bigger cams ?

did DSLR replace MFBD - I think so for 80% - it took a few years but they did......snip.......

There are exceptions to every rule but I'm not really talking or concerned with what cameras are used for motion, or stills.   Red, a 5d2 or a Phase, the cameras aren't the issue.

There is not a still photographer living, that doesn't have thoughts today about how to deal with video, either on the positive side, or the negative and how it impacts their business and their art.

My opinion is now is the time to play to your strengths.  If your great at motion, go that direction, be great, be more than great.  If still photography is where your talent is, stick with it, live, breath, do it and do it until you just can't keep your eyes open.

Any of the arts are a tough sell, regardless of the economy and I've never subscribed to the belief that an artist can only be one dimensional, in art, business or human interaction.

Still (no pun intended), the economy has forced a lot of artists to look deep into their repertoire and try to make changes.  Change can be good, but success comes from playing to your strengths and addressing your weaknesses. 

Most photographer's client's recognize them for one thing, but that perception can be changed if you produce great work in another medium and if you get their attention.

If you have the talent, resources and willingness to offer both motion and stills, then I applaud it, but make sure your really, really  good at one medium, before going towards another one.

I would say this to Phase also.  Make sure your still cameras really are the world's best, before even thinking about making a video camera.

IMO

BC

[fredjeang]

BCooter, I think you are absolutly right.

The path you describe is indeed the only one I can think of for, at least, a personal acheivement; and if a good or not successful carrier can be done that's maybe what matters less.
I think one must enjoy and feels passion and really work hard. Doing an imagery, stills or video or collages that can be proud of it. Very important is doing what we really feel deeply, what we are good at, and delegate the wicknesses.

But I'm thinking also that in the professional panorama, and this is not new, 95% of the photographers or film makers will never be a Kurosawa or a Arnold Newman, but working people with probably less talent, destiny, who need to eat with an imagery that will never be in the art's museums, or in the double pages of the Vogues.

I'm thinking of those guys that I see in the stadiums with their long guns, those who are compressed on the political meetings, the weddings etc...
For those, video will be almost an obliged path and not necessary it will be asked top imagery but decent.

The ones who will produce top imagery will be probably the ones on the top of the pyramid. But it's like the iceberg you know, a little visible part on the light and the most of it under dark water, trying hard to survive. For those, small productions videos is IMO not that much of an option.

Cheers.

 

[Morgan_Moore]

My opinion is now is the time to play to your strengths.  If your great at motion, go that direction, be great, be more than great.  If still photography is where your talent is, stick with it, live, breath, do it and do it until you just can't keep your eyes open.

IMO if I/we/you have a skill it is probably not 'photography' or 'motion' it is comunication through images, conceptualisation whatever

I work with a younger photographer, he may be a better camera operator than I am, certainly he is more tuned in at sport which he does every weekend and I do twice a year

Im a decade ahead of him however in choosing what to photograph or how to photograph it or even thinking why to photograph it at all

The 'role' im trying to develop is probably as someone who can conceptualise/direct/build images - the person that decides (simply) that swimwear may be best photographed on a beach, or casual wear on a farm or in the countryside, that the casual wear may fit soft backlight the swimwear may fit a hard light (or might not)

I suppose that role is 'director of photography' which is comes from the motion lexicon but i feel can fit to the StillMo lexicon too

Once you have built the scene I think it is then logical to capture it in both stills and motion

I have assisted on bigger shoots where I pressed the button on the camera while the 'photgrapher' hung with the client by the tethered screen directing me - I feel that he was still the 'photographer' in that case because the scene was his

Becoming a half decent 'director of images' is the skill I am building ?

S

[fredjeang]

IMO if I/we/you have a skill it is probably not 'photography' or 'motion' it is comunication through images, conceptualisation whatever

I work with a younger photographer, he may be a better camera operator than I am, certainly he is more tuned in at sport which he does every weekend and I do twice a year

Im a decade ahead of him however in choosing what to photograph or how to photograph it or even thinking why to photograph it at all

The 'role' im trying to develop is probably as someone who can conceptualise/direct/build images - the person that decides (simply) that swimwear may be best photographed on a beach, or casual wear on a farm or in the countryside, that the casual wear may fit soft backlight the swimwear may fit a hard light (or might not)

I suppose that role is 'director of photography' which is comes from the motion lexicon but i feel can fit to the StillMo lexicon too

Once you have built the scene I think it is then logical to capture it in both stills and motion

I have assisted on bigger shoots where I pressed the button on the camera while the 'photgrapher' hung with the client by the tethered screen directing me - I feel that he was still the 'photographer' in that case because the scene was his

Becoming a half decent 'director of images' is the skill I am building ?

S

Yes Morgan, I lke the "director of images" idea. I've been expressed it in another thread. Indeed, what is happening with the tech and mass culture is that from an artistical point of view there is a despecialisation while from a technical point of view there are needs for more very specialised tasks.

[Morgan_Moore]

Yes Morgan, I lke the "director of images" idea. I've been expressed it in another thread. Indeed, what is happening with the tech and mass culture is that from an artistical point of view there is a despecialisation while from a technical point of view there are needs for more very specialised tasks.

I think I see it the other way round, todays excellent and affordable and easy to use tools (5dmk2 and D3) means that specialist technical skills or budgets are not really required, leaving us with just one thing to market 'the eye' for a good image be that a Still or a Mo

Typically I have operated in a world where there is a financial and skill barrier to entry, be that image transmission technology (ISDN) , analogue scanners, glossy publishable digital (H1+22mp), manual focus, low ISO

Even shooting imgaes you could not check (film) made just aquisition 'hard'

Now one can with $3k of kit take and deliver a very wonderful image with a low technical skill level and minimal financial input

S

[bcooter]

I think I see it the other way round, todays excellent and affordable and easy to use tools (5dmk2 and D3) means that specialist technical skills or budgets are not really required, leaving us with just one thing to market 'the eye' for a good image be that a ....snip.

Be careful about what you wish for, it may sort of happen, at least for the next few years.

The point of entry for acceptable stills and video keeps getting perceptually lowered and if it's ok to shoot a movie with a 5d2 and 4 dedo lights remember that once that level of quality becomes the standard, the next level is 1 point and shoot and 1 dedo, the next is a flip camera and no lights.

Seriously, I just saw an international client do a production where they sent flip phones to all their affiliates and had them personally shoot the video.   Even two years ago a crew would have been commissioned to go around the world.

Why, because it's now acceptable to do one flip camera and no lights and before you think "OMG that'll never work", with the right editor, a few tricks, some sound sweeting, it will probably be good enough . . .  maybe better than good enough.

Also remember it's not important what I think, it's important what the people paying me/you/us  thinks and if image making continues as a profession there has to be some kind of wall or level or acceptance that can't be done by just anybody with an inexpensive camera.

Does higher production values lead to better storytelling.  No, but if everything is equal . . . talent, story, intent, then higher production values always makes a better production.

Look at these two very different projects and tell me if they can be shot on the cheap.  Well, maybe a portion of them, but not with the same results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5xCGZuvhWI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twivg7GkYts&feature=related


This conversation can be condensed to the thought that most people want to achieve a high level with the smallest amount of outlay and investment.   Long term that rarely happens.

IMO


BC

[fredjeang]

Again a very interesting statement.

I think that big production will always have a place. We are in fact in a weired moment where "todo vale" , but will the photographers being able to handle working at the highest level in terms of motion imagery? Because the budgets are quite different between high-end still works and high-end video/cine works. I think the clients will decide.
One needs a van when the other needs at least a truck.
I remember years ago I had a job in a video company specialized in industrial movies and each little tournage was a full truck. We where filming pipelines, gaz instalations, these sort of things. But it was like a little cinema production and all the gear weights tons.

[Morgan_Moore]

IMO it depends on what you mean by 'on the cheap'

I think the D3 and way less lighting than an 100ISO H1 is very often 'good enough'

that is my concept of 'cheap'

As for the 7/5d I dont think it is really 'there' yet, but will be in a couple of generations

Both of the vids you showed still have skilled creation, concept, camera angles, cuts, but there is not reason that they cant be made (esp for web res) with 'cheap' gear

Of course you can take it to the Nth extreme - flip phone, conpact digicam, but those things still can never get a filmic look which is sensor size driven

Flip 4/3? - Id get one 

I just think the main thing we need to market is skill rather than kit

S

[bcooter]

IMO it depends on what you mean by 'on the cheap'

I think the D3 and way less lighting than an 100ISO H1 is very often 'good enough'

that is my concept of 'cheap'........snip..............

I just think the main thing we need to market is skill rather than kit

S

I've said it, everybody's said it . . . that equipment doesn't matter.

Well, I'll go on record and say for professional image making  it does.  

Try shooting a large still project non-tethered, or with iffy software, or with the same camera that your client owns.  At that stage, regardless of your talent, eye, whatever you want to call it, the project is marginalized in the view of the client and most importantly you have (at least I have) this feeling that I have to do better, do what I feel is right.

Lately it's become a 5d2 world and not because of quality, or "the look", it's just price and the thought that it's "good enough"   That thought doesn't move any of us forward and along with turning a profit, running a successful business, the goal is to be better.

But as far as what we market, skill or talent is just one element.

Right now every photographer living is wrestling with the issues of should we shoot with what we know is the right tools, production requirements, materials, artistic elements, or should we just shoot what "they're paying for".

To move forward I firmly believe with all my heart that we have to shoot with what we feel is right for us, hang the cost, even if we have to absorb the costs, because without moving up we go nowhere.

Maybe the real thought is not to please, but to excel beyond the point any client could have anticipated.  Maybe get past the "uh yea, they like it", to the response, of "they were f*&%ing blown away".

I believe were on the cusp of something great coming out of this economic downturn where image making won't be marginalized, but will be taken further than ever before.  Right now it's a mess and nobody seems to have the exact answers but deciding to shoot a 5d or a RED, a Nikon Vs. a Hasselblad "should" be more image dependent that cost depended.  

This project was shot with three different cameras, two different digital backs, two formats, hmi, tungsten, daylight mixed, studio strobes and hand held strobe.  (don't let the cropping fool you because each image has been cropped and moved to fit the layouts).

Even video segments were shot with three different cameras, because each camera had it's own specialty.



IMO

BC

[fredjeang]

Lately it's become a 5d2 world and not because of quality, or "the look", it's just price and the thought that it's "good enough"  

Absolutly!

I believe were on the cusp of something great coming out of this economic downturn where image making won't be marginalized, but will be taken further than ever before. Right now it's a mess and nobody seems to have the exact answers but deciding to shoot a 5d or a RED, a Nikon Vs. a Hasselblad "should" be more image dependent that cost depended.

Great shots really. And I perceive an esthetic evolution within the same style.
What worries me, is me...because on the 5th pic, normally I would have looked to the model, but instead I was looking to the plateau equipment...

Discipline Fred, discipline!

[fredjeang]

Hey, can we make one of those stupid  "who is who" blind test? I can't resist...

I bet that:

Pic 1 is MF Leaf
pic 2 is 35mm *
pic 3 is MF Phase1
pic 4 is Don't know
pic 5 is 35mm
pic 6 is 35mm
pic 7 is MF with a Leaf back

*all 35mm are Canon 5D2

[Morgan_Moore]

I've said it, everybody's said it . . . that equipment doesn't matter.

Well, I'll go on record and say for professional image making  it does.  

I dunno

They are awesome images whatever they were shot on

because of the great content styling lighting etc

Its interesting you talk about client experience - or even photographer experience, I find that so difficult to communicate with (potential) clients, I think my 'big compared to my rivals package' is justifiable, because it makes me faster, smoother, and less likely to fail and therefore better value

my 'cheapo' D3 is rock solid in a way that my blad is not, Im certainly a big fan of solid and reliable kit

my 5d is a lot more solid now I have $2k Vlock  batteries bla bla - I think my 5d has cost me about $20+k with all the toys, all things that I think add to a production, reliability, speed whatever

a lot of that investment does not actually show in the footage, only the ease of aquisition

As is the case with every 'argument' the answer is usually not black or white but some shade of grey

People just need to find their place in the market

It is a pleasure to read your input

Embarrasing to show my low production value  images but here we go - client small wool company

Kit..
Nikon D3, Nikkor 50 1.4 - nothing else at all - nothing- no assistant no tether, no crew, no retouch, no make up, no lights

Also no crew, no lights, no director,  5d vid for the same client (horribly compressed by them)
http://www.thenaturalfibre.co.uk/media-centre/video4

[fredjeang]

In fact, I think both B.C and Morgan are right.

There is a market of small/very small companies that will never have the budget for big production and it is one photographer with simple set .
Yesterday on my way back home after a stupid shooting, I passed by a political building. There was dozens of the same guys with their Canons waiting for some thing. Back to the newspaper with stills and video for the web, one 5D2 on tripod filming and the guy shooting the stills hand with the other canon 1D3. It's kind of a basic configuration.

Then, big campaign and higher budgets, that is where BC is right. Today, there is a jungle there and a lot of confusion. In the end, some kind of imagery need heavy prod, other no.

Quality (not talking about artistic there), as much as one can do at one point, will always be a plus no doubt.

[bcooter]

Hey, can we make one of those stupid  "who is who" blind test? I can't resist...

I bet that:

Pic 1 is MF Leaf
pic 2 is 35mm *
pic 3 is MF Phase1
pic 4 is Don't know
pic 5 is 35mm
pic 6 is 35mm
pic 7 is MF with a Leaf back

*all 35mm are Canon 5D2

OK, well I didn't want to do a comparison and luckily at this size nobody is going to argue pixels, but going top to bottom.

In fact I never selected the equipment thinking about pure resolution, but only for the camera/lens I felt had the right look and what i was comfortable with, though some of these images will be reproduced quite large, all will go print size to full page and double truck, all to web size.



Column 1

1. Subject on NY Set.
 P30+, 45mm, Key light 650 watt broncolor HMI, interior set light 1000 watt arri tungsten frensel, subject rim light 250 watt arri tungsten, wall light 650 watt arri tungsten.  Molpars in background or for props.
I shot this both the the 1ds3 and the p30+ at 800 iso.  Grain, noise was virtually identical, though the whites held better with the p30+ and I love the 45mm lens.

2.  Subject in Mustang
p21+, 45mm lens, Daylight mixed with 2 400 watt Kobal Brons, with 1/4 inch spun and screens.   Shot the p21+ to hold the whites.

3.  Subject on Beach
Canon 1ds3,   Daylight mixed with profoto 600b.
Would have used Contax, but sync only went to 125th, needed at least 1 250th, probably more.  An H series blad would have been perfect for this image.

4.  Subject in studio cart.
p21+, 45mm lens, image stretch with content aware to fit layout.  p21+ used ostly for speed and to hold the highlights.  Lighting, on flash camera strobes synced to Paparazzi's lights (staged).


Column 2

1.  Subject on Apple Crate
p30+, 45mm lens. tungsten 1k's and small 350's.  

2.  Subject Running
Nikon D700, used for autofocus and for the look of my 200 f2 lens.  Bronocolor 650 HMI with 1/4 spun and mixed daylight.

3.  Subject in studio cart, black and white.
p21+  broncolor 650, feathered and daylight mix with white fill.


All processed in C1 V5.